The High Court refused Denis Connaughton’s application for discovery and related reliefs in his case against Start Mortgages DAC, finding that the request came before the issues between the parties had been sufficiently defined in the pleadings.
Mr Justice Conleth Bradley delivered the judgment on 17 April 2025. Connaughton, who is representing himself, had issued a plenary summons in May 2024 and had not yet delivered a statement of claim. His October 2024 motion sought documents and sworn explanations relating to a 2005 mortgage, including loan conditions, interest calculations, the broker’s agency, and the transfer of the mortgage. He also sought a stay of Circuit Court proceedings and an order preventing any transfer of interest until he received the information he said he needed to complete his claim.
The judgment records Connaughton’s allegations that documents he had received contained errors, that deeds were defective, and that the mortgage account and its transfers raised questions. He also alleged issues concerning interest, compensation funds, securitisation and data protection. These were his claims and submissions; the court did not determine their truth in this application.
The judge said Connaughton had copies of some documents and that, in substance, he was seeking access to originals to check alleged defects. Under the rules of court, discovery generally requires a prior written request specifying the document categories and why each is required. Connaughton had not followed that process. The judge also found no exceptional circumstances to justify discovery before delivery of a statement of claim. The issues in contention had not yet been sufficiently identified, and any discovery application would have to await closure of the pleadings.
The court also refused the requested stays and other ancillary reliefs. The judgment said there was insufficient information about the detail and current status of the other proceedings, and described those requests as attached to the application’s central purpose of obtaining access to original documents. The judge made no finding on the underlying mortgage allegations and did not rule out possible later applications after the pleadings close.
The order refused Connaughton’s application and all ancillary reliefs. The substantive case was returned to the High Court Non-Jury List. A motion by Start Mortgages to strike out the case had not been heard and was adjourned to travel with the substantive motion. The matter was listed for mention on 29 April 2025 to address costs.